Newsletter June 25, 2022: The Good and Bad Council News
The Good News: Council has some of the pickleball and leaf-blower impacts covered. Council Members spent several hours in June Council meetings, with lots of resident and stakeholder input, discussing and debating and allocating funding to mitigate the offensive and nerve-racking noise from pickleball and leaf-blowers that has been impacting neighbours. Home
There have been other meetings, fairly recently, where these same issues have been debated, However, it would have been be exhilarating to report that the same amount of time, energy and concern had gone into how to mitigate the harmful community impacts that this Council’s densification initiatives will result in.
Most Council members seem to be unaware of how disruptive and expensive multi-tenant basement suites, garden suites, laneway houses, and infill development will be to so many neighbours and the community in general. According to the District's Infill Report, Council’s single-family Infill Development Initiatives include:
Source: Infill Housing Strategy Report – Engagement Summary, Draft Guiding Principles and Key Directions This Report was received by Council on June 15, 2021 - link https://oakbay.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=1004
Council’s June 20, 2022 four-hour Council Meeting considered three items: Pickle-ball Court sound mitigation; Sidewalk Patio Expansion Program and McNeil Avenue Traffic Calming. Even with all the new administrative staff (including several in Engineering) two of these projects required contacting consultants to help staff to provide these reports to Council.
Due to the length of the meeting, a fourth agenda Item was tabled:
Agenda Item 7.2: Infrastructure Project Delivery Capabilities, Capacities and Outcomes includes a report that recommends hiring yet another “5 permanent administration staff members” at a cost of $700,000 plus a long list of many tens-of thousands of tax dollars that will be added to this expenditure. This item has been moved to the June 27, 2022 Council Meeting.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (See Appendices #1 & #2 for more important information)
The Bad News: It seems to us the more administrative staff the District hires, the busier and over-worked they become and the more consultants they have to hire to assist them.
Council hired a dedicated administrator, at a cost of $154,219 plus expenses and 20/30% in benefits, to provide a Council priorities report and updates (previously provided by exiting staff). However, although this report identifies almost 100 Council priorities, it is not clear to us who is responsible for deciding which of these priorities are to be addressed first?
The Oxford Dictionary defines a priority as. “something that is more important than other things”.
For example: Although there have been many much less important issues brought before Council this term, the infrastructure has continued to be underfunded (See Infrastructure Sustainable Chart and Information Appendix #1). Our question: how important can these “other things” possibly be? Especially when the Chart lists our natural assets (trees, vegetation, soil filtration) as “Not Applicable”.
Many previous resident surveys and the results of the 2018 election identified the $460 million-dollar infrastructure deficit (over half of which is “end-of-life), as a top priority. Therefore, the infrastructure’s present capacity should have been considered, and improvements adequately funded and implemented, before moving ahead with Council’s planned. expansive densification initiatives.
These facts however, did not stop Council from following the previous Council’s lead by continuing to spend hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on development consultant contracts, expensive new administrative staff, a $1,500,000 municipal hall upgrade, before moving ahead with their planned densification initiatives.
It is not good policy to move ahead with the amount of Council's single-family neighbourhood densification, given most of the planned infill development is not-taxable and will have harmful effects on the whole community, without a comprehensive assessment of how the impacts will be funded and impacts addressed. The official Community Plan Housing Objective #1 page 77 supports this approach.
It also is reasonable for residents to expect the funding to be in place for the impacts on Oak Bay’s “end-of-life” roads, sewers, storm drain and water pipe systems, as-well-as the District’s annual budgets, these will be felt for years to come – (See example Appendix #2.)
What appears to make little sense is hiring a team of 5 more expensive administration engineering staff to develop a “governance capital project delivery framework”. When according to the June 20, 2022 Engineering Report, the core staff, the staff that actually does the “framework delivery” construction, is “stretched to capacity”.
It is also worrying that, according to Engineering Department, when Council was provided in September 2021 with Engineering’s Infrastructure Renewal Program, “The question of how to practically increase capital renewal work was not discussed in depth at that time.”
It seems to us that the $700,000 plus all of the other associated expenses detailed in the report, that could be close to or more than a $1,000,000, would be better spent on core staff to renew and upgrade the 'failing" infrastructure.
Council must be aware that residents have suffered so many unpredictable infrastructure failures, that have and will continue occur, e.g. the 2020/2021 storm-drain failures and the McNeil, Margate, and Hampshire floods, to name a few, These and future infrastructure pipe failures, due to capacity issues; “end of life” pipe systems and extreme weather events will add, and have added, significantly to the District core staff’s workload.
This, when combined with the harmful impacts of Council’s implemented community-wide densification, means that no amount of new administration engineering personnel will be able to address or predict these infrastructure impact disasters.
Council this term has spent an awful lot of funding and staff time on densification initiatives that will only make Oak Bay’s failing infrastructure worse. They have also spent a disproportional amount of time covering trivial items while failing to fully consider and provide adequate information on the important issues identified by residents and that are facing the Community.
The good news is: a civic election is October 15, 2022.
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1: Sustainable Infrastructure Plan June 2021
Note:
The Good News: Council has some of the pickleball and leaf-blower impacts covered. Council Members spent several hours in June Council meetings, with lots of resident and stakeholder input, discussing and debating and allocating funding to mitigate the offensive and nerve-racking noise from pickleball and leaf-blowers that has been impacting neighbours. Home
There have been other meetings, fairly recently, where these same issues have been debated, However, it would have been be exhilarating to report that the same amount of time, energy and concern had gone into how to mitigate the harmful community impacts that this Council’s densification initiatives will result in.
Most Council members seem to be unaware of how disruptive and expensive multi-tenant basement suites, garden suites, laneway houses, and infill development will be to so many neighbours and the community in general. According to the District's Infill Report, Council’s single-family Infill Development Initiatives include:
- Detached Suites (laneway houses and garden suites are an example)
- Duplexes (a building with two units that are independently owned)
- Triplexes (a building with three units that are independently owned)
- Townhouses (a building with multiple units that are independently owned)
- Heritage Conversions (converts existing heritage homes into multiple units)
- Subdivision of Larger Lots (larger lots can be subdivided to allow for new single detached homes)
Source: Infill Housing Strategy Report – Engagement Summary, Draft Guiding Principles and Key Directions This Report was received by Council on June 15, 2021 - link https://oakbay.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=1004
Council’s June 20, 2022 four-hour Council Meeting considered three items: Pickle-ball Court sound mitigation; Sidewalk Patio Expansion Program and McNeil Avenue Traffic Calming. Even with all the new administrative staff (including several in Engineering) two of these projects required contacting consultants to help staff to provide these reports to Council.
Due to the length of the meeting, a fourth agenda Item was tabled:
Agenda Item 7.2: Infrastructure Project Delivery Capabilities, Capacities and Outcomes includes a report that recommends hiring yet another “5 permanent administration staff members” at a cost of $700,000 plus a long list of many tens-of thousands of tax dollars that will be added to this expenditure. This item has been moved to the June 27, 2022 Council Meeting.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (See Appendices #1 & #2 for more important information)
The Bad News: It seems to us the more administrative staff the District hires, the busier and over-worked they become and the more consultants they have to hire to assist them.
Council hired a dedicated administrator, at a cost of $154,219 plus expenses and 20/30% in benefits, to provide a Council priorities report and updates (previously provided by exiting staff). However, although this report identifies almost 100 Council priorities, it is not clear to us who is responsible for deciding which of these priorities are to be addressed first?
The Oxford Dictionary defines a priority as. “something that is more important than other things”.
For example: Although there have been many much less important issues brought before Council this term, the infrastructure has continued to be underfunded (See Infrastructure Sustainable Chart and Information Appendix #1). Our question: how important can these “other things” possibly be? Especially when the Chart lists our natural assets (trees, vegetation, soil filtration) as “Not Applicable”.
Many previous resident surveys and the results of the 2018 election identified the $460 million-dollar infrastructure deficit (over half of which is “end-of-life), as a top priority. Therefore, the infrastructure’s present capacity should have been considered, and improvements adequately funded and implemented, before moving ahead with Council’s planned. expansive densification initiatives.
These facts however, did not stop Council from following the previous Council’s lead by continuing to spend hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on development consultant contracts, expensive new administrative staff, a $1,500,000 municipal hall upgrade, before moving ahead with their planned densification initiatives.
It is not good policy to move ahead with the amount of Council's single-family neighbourhood densification, given most of the planned infill development is not-taxable and will have harmful effects on the whole community, without a comprehensive assessment of how the impacts will be funded and impacts addressed. The official Community Plan Housing Objective #1 page 77 supports this approach.
It also is reasonable for residents to expect the funding to be in place for the impacts on Oak Bay’s “end-of-life” roads, sewers, storm drain and water pipe systems, as-well-as the District’s annual budgets, these will be felt for years to come – (See example Appendix #2.)
What appears to make little sense is hiring a team of 5 more expensive administration engineering staff to develop a “governance capital project delivery framework”. When according to the June 20, 2022 Engineering Report, the core staff, the staff that actually does the “framework delivery” construction, is “stretched to capacity”.
It is also worrying that, according to Engineering Department, when Council was provided in September 2021 with Engineering’s Infrastructure Renewal Program, “The question of how to practically increase capital renewal work was not discussed in depth at that time.”
It seems to us that the $700,000 plus all of the other associated expenses detailed in the report, that could be close to or more than a $1,000,000, would be better spent on core staff to renew and upgrade the 'failing" infrastructure.
Council must be aware that residents have suffered so many unpredictable infrastructure failures, that have and will continue occur, e.g. the 2020/2021 storm-drain failures and the McNeil, Margate, and Hampshire floods, to name a few, These and future infrastructure pipe failures, due to capacity issues; “end of life” pipe systems and extreme weather events will add, and have added, significantly to the District core staff’s workload.
This, when combined with the harmful impacts of Council’s implemented community-wide densification, means that no amount of new administration engineering personnel will be able to address or predict these infrastructure impact disasters.
Council this term has spent an awful lot of funding and staff time on densification initiatives that will only make Oak Bay’s failing infrastructure worse. They have also spent a disproportional amount of time covering trivial items while failing to fully consider and provide adequate information on the important issues identified by residents and that are facing the Community.
The good news is: a civic election is October 15, 2022.
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1: Sustainable Infrastructure Plan June 2021
Note:
- Grey areas indicate underfunded end-of-life roads and below ground pipes
- Natural Assets: Trees, vegetation and natural soil filtration is not an Oak Bay “applicable” consideration
- Almost all of the building asset $1,900,000 building funding went into the new municipal hall upgrades, including offices for new administration staff.
- The funding source for the close to 1/2 million dollars for the Bowker development, Bowker/Cadboro Day Road intersection infrastructure upgrades is not clear.
Note: All levels of Government have dithered around for 7 or 8 years now on the Uplands Combined Sewer Separation Project, It’s no surprise, except to governments, that costs substantially increase over the years, not decrease. This bureaucratic procrastination, particularly the 2022 disastrous increases, will have substantive implications on Oak Bay’s reserve funds. It’s no wonder that inflation cost information and the financial impacts have been “conspicuous by their absence.”
Excerpts from a June 10, 2022 Times Colonist Opinion Article: Victoria’s infrastructure https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/comment-are-the-city-of-victorias-trading-cards-terrific-treasures-or-trash-5464088
“Municipal infrastructure is vital to sustaining the economic, environmental, social and cultural life of our community.”
“The quality of life enjoyed by our citizens is directly related to the condition of the infrastructure.”
“The city’s own reports on the current status of community assets suggests that roads are deteriorating from ongoing wear and extreme weather events quicker than they are being fixed and upgraded.”
“Many residents and businesses are experiencing hard times and have just received their city tax notice.”
Appendix #2: Oak Bay Resident Letter to Council
Note: The factual information in the resident’s letter could not have been any plainer, clearer and understandable. However, to date, Council has not provided adequate information about how any of the resident’s important points will be addressed. They are: the infrastructure impacts; additional services cost; 2 million dollar infrastructure upgrade for one multi-dwelling building; very limited enforcement sanctions etc.
Given the importance of the seriousness and far-reaching impacts to the Community outlined in the letter and Council’s lack of responce, so much for Council’s Vision Statement, “Oak Bay’s residents are active contributors in local decision-making, working collaboratively with municipal Council and staff “
Resident Letter to Council
Correspondence, October 2021: Agenda Item 7.1 Planning Department Report – Secondary Suite Study Final Report
“While the wording of this section is correct, in regards to water and sewer utilities, it fails to address the main infrastructure issue in Oak Bay; the sad, old and tired state of our invisible infrastructure, our pipes. With every new secondary suite, there are a minimum of two additional sinks, one toilet and one tub and/or shower. While charges are based on usage, there is no consideration of the current infrastructures ability to handle the additional load from the additional secondary suites, nor a contribution to the replacement costs for infrastructure upgrades and replacements.”
“An analysis of a recent proposed development of 72 units near the village, noted that the current infrastructure could not accommodate this additional load without a 2 million dollar upgrade. (Class D Estimate +/- 50%)”
“I feel this is a major oversight and not accounted for in this study. How will the district manage the additional burden on our very poor infrastructure, that secondary suites, across the entire district, will add?”
“An analysis of a recent proposed development of 72 units near the village, noted that the current infrastructure could not accommodate this additional load without a 2 million dollar upgrade. (Class D Estimate +/- 50%)”
Other Concerns:
“Are there considerations for the additional costs additional people in the district will add? Eg; Fire, Police, Parks and Rec, Garbage and Recycling, Bylaw Enforcement, general wear and tear on roads, and other district assets, that the district will not be able to recoup from the secondary suite owner? Will a secondary suite, without any associated fees or increased taxes, be a monetary benefit to the suite owner, and the rest of the citizens of OB will have to pay for the associated increase in costs that the additional people in Oak Bay will bring? Is there going to be additional tax increases to accommodate the district wide costs of more secondary suites?”
“With no way to recoup these costs, how will the district account for, and find the funds for the all the increased demands on the infrastructure and their associated costs? While I am indifferent to secondary suites in Oak Bay, those that benefit, the owners of the suites, should cover the additional costs to the district that their suites will bring.
There are also concerns and considerations on livability, and the impact more suites, maybe more than one per house, will have on the character of Oak Bay. Without owner occupancy requirements, I see multiple property landlords, development companies and others with capital to invest, jumping on the opportunity that this will present.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-investors-account-for-a-fifth-of-home-purchases-in-canada-are-they/
“Finally, if a violation of any of the new 'rules and regulations' beyond safety considerations, leads to, as it has in the past, a note on title but no actually monetary penalty or forced compliance, it doesn't see any disincentive to convert a single-family home into a single-family home with multiple secondary suites. I hope you can prove me wrong on this and it is being thought through. Please get it right this time, the first time, and then we can all be spared the long, labourious process that the implementation of Secondary Suites in Oak Bay has been.”
“Sincerely Oak Bay Resident”
Excerpts from a June 10, 2022 Times Colonist Opinion Article: Victoria’s infrastructure https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/comment-are-the-city-of-victorias-trading-cards-terrific-treasures-or-trash-5464088
“Municipal infrastructure is vital to sustaining the economic, environmental, social and cultural life of our community.”
“The quality of life enjoyed by our citizens is directly related to the condition of the infrastructure.”
“The city’s own reports on the current status of community assets suggests that roads are deteriorating from ongoing wear and extreme weather events quicker than they are being fixed and upgraded.”
“Many residents and businesses are experiencing hard times and have just received their city tax notice.”
Appendix #2: Oak Bay Resident Letter to Council
Note: The factual information in the resident’s letter could not have been any plainer, clearer and understandable. However, to date, Council has not provided adequate information about how any of the resident’s important points will be addressed. They are: the infrastructure impacts; additional services cost; 2 million dollar infrastructure upgrade for one multi-dwelling building; very limited enforcement sanctions etc.
Given the importance of the seriousness and far-reaching impacts to the Community outlined in the letter and Council’s lack of responce, so much for Council’s Vision Statement, “Oak Bay’s residents are active contributors in local decision-making, working collaboratively with municipal Council and staff “
Resident Letter to Council
Correspondence, October 2021: Agenda Item 7.1 Planning Department Report – Secondary Suite Study Final Report
“While the wording of this section is correct, in regards to water and sewer utilities, it fails to address the main infrastructure issue in Oak Bay; the sad, old and tired state of our invisible infrastructure, our pipes. With every new secondary suite, there are a minimum of two additional sinks, one toilet and one tub and/or shower. While charges are based on usage, there is no consideration of the current infrastructures ability to handle the additional load from the additional secondary suites, nor a contribution to the replacement costs for infrastructure upgrades and replacements.”
“An analysis of a recent proposed development of 72 units near the village, noted that the current infrastructure could not accommodate this additional load without a 2 million dollar upgrade. (Class D Estimate +/- 50%)”
“I feel this is a major oversight and not accounted for in this study. How will the district manage the additional burden on our very poor infrastructure, that secondary suites, across the entire district, will add?”
“An analysis of a recent proposed development of 72 units near the village, noted that the current infrastructure could not accommodate this additional load without a 2 million dollar upgrade. (Class D Estimate +/- 50%)”
Other Concerns:
“Are there considerations for the additional costs additional people in the district will add? Eg; Fire, Police, Parks and Rec, Garbage and Recycling, Bylaw Enforcement, general wear and tear on roads, and other district assets, that the district will not be able to recoup from the secondary suite owner? Will a secondary suite, without any associated fees or increased taxes, be a monetary benefit to the suite owner, and the rest of the citizens of OB will have to pay for the associated increase in costs that the additional people in Oak Bay will bring? Is there going to be additional tax increases to accommodate the district wide costs of more secondary suites?”
“With no way to recoup these costs, how will the district account for, and find the funds for the all the increased demands on the infrastructure and their associated costs? While I am indifferent to secondary suites in Oak Bay, those that benefit, the owners of the suites, should cover the additional costs to the district that their suites will bring.
There are also concerns and considerations on livability, and the impact more suites, maybe more than one per house, will have on the character of Oak Bay. Without owner occupancy requirements, I see multiple property landlords, development companies and others with capital to invest, jumping on the opportunity that this will present.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-investors-account-for-a-fifth-of-home-purchases-in-canada-are-they/
“Finally, if a violation of any of the new 'rules and regulations' beyond safety considerations, leads to, as it has in the past, a note on title but no actually monetary penalty or forced compliance, it doesn't see any disincentive to convert a single-family home into a single-family home with multiple secondary suites. I hope you can prove me wrong on this and it is being thought through. Please get it right this time, the first time, and then we can all be spared the long, labourious process that the implementation of Secondary Suites in Oak Bay has been.”
“Sincerely Oak Bay Resident”